Midterm Flashcards
supererogatory
payment beyond what is due or asked; more than what you want or need
Utility (as used by Mill)
Measure of pleasure and pain; pleasure itself, absence of pain
Euthyphro dialogue
socrates runs into Euthyphro outside the courthouse. Euthyphro is charging his dad with murder. one of his servants murdered someone, so he threw him in a ditch and he died.
what is piety
what is dear to the Gods is pious and what is not dear is impious
What is the Euthyphro dilemma?
Is a wrong action wrong because God forbids it or does God forbid it because it is wrong?
What are the two options to the Euthyphro dilemma?
option 1: A is wrong because God forbids it
Option 2: God forbids A because A is wrong
What is the problem with option 2 in the euthyphro dilemma?
there is no answer to the truth maker question. God drops out of morality. Moral standard of morality is independent of God; it changes is God is involved in the moral argument
How would a theist answer the truth maker question to Euthyphro Dilemma
option 1: God’s not going to command us in the wrong way; God’s will and command come fro his nature which is perfectly good
Option 2: objective moral truths are made truly by gods nature or created order
Hypothetical imperative
If you want x, do y
Categorical imperative
do x
What are maxims
Reason for acting; when we act, we act according to maxims
Universal law formulation of the categorical imperative
“act only in accordance with that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law”
whether you could will that everyone act just as you do and on your maxim
What does it mean for a maxim to be universal
Everyone can act on that maxim; an action is wrong if and only if its maxim isn’t universal. An action is permissible if and only if its maxim is universal
How to determine whether an action is wrong or permissible according to the universal law formulation of the categorical imperative
Step 1: figure out the maxim
Step 2: can you imagine a world in which everyone act on that maxim
Step 3: could you rationally will that everyone act on your maxim? can the goal of the action be achieved in such world?
Universal law formulation of the categorial imperative on lying promises
Contradiction in conception; breaks down at step 2; if everyone is making lying promises, we’d lose trust; promises would break and use value
Universal law formulation of the categorical imperative on suicide
There is a contradiction: we are made to survive, not everyone would kill themselves when miserable. There is a biological law to preserve life
Universal law formulation of the categorical imperative on not cultivating talents
Contradiction in step 3. if no-one cultivated their talents, we wouldn’t have an easier life
Universal law formulation of the categorical imperative on not caring about others
Contradiction in step 2. we naturally will to have others help us and a will to help others
Problem with the universal law formulation
The theory says some act is wrong that we don’t think is wrong. the theory says some act s wrong that we think is wrong
Examples of the problem with the universal law formulation
Withdrawing all of your money to retire, train in curling to be a professional and live a comfortable life, and making a lying promise to get money for a wax sculpture of your mom. Kant would say these are wrong, but we don’t find them wrong
Humanity as an end in itself formulation
” act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in any other person, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means”: we should respect other people by not using them as mere props or tools to get what we want
Determining if an act is wrong or permissible according to the humanity as an end in itself formulation
step 1: isolate the maxim
step 2: who is involved
step 3: would anyone not consent to their part if they knew the true maxim?
step 3a: for each person, suppose they have full knowledge of all features
step 3b: see I each person would consent
mere vs mere means
using someone to check you out at the grocery store is using them as a means. using someone to get money by making a lying promise is using them as a mere means, whenever coercion (manipulation) is involve, it is not right because no one would consent to it
Do Kantian believe in objective moral truths?
Kant and mill both fit best as objectivist, Kant is supposed to maximize utility, so yes he believes in objective moral truths
Deontological ethics vs consequentialist ethics
deontological ethics focuses on judging the actions themselves while consequentialist focuses on judging the moral truth of the actions.
Deontological ethics would rather focus on whether or not an action is correct while the consequentialist would focus on the consequences of the action
What kind of imperative is the moral law?
Law of morality is the categorical imperative as it would require someone to do something irrespective of ones aims or goals; do something regardless of the aftermath
Consequentialism
the moral status of an action depends exclusively on the actual consequences of that action: what are the consequences of that action?
welfarism
The relevant consequences are the actions effects on the welfare of the people; in particular, what are the actions consequences on individual human welfare
Hedonism
the view that humans psychologically constructed in a way that we aways desire pleasure; an individuals welfare is a matter of the balance of subjective pleasures and pains he/she experiences; what are the actions consequences on the subjective experiences of individuals?
Equality
everyones welfare counts equally; for each individual affected by the action, aggregate the pleasures she would experience and that pains she would experience. this is the balance of pains and pleasures for that individual. now take the balance of pains and pleasures for each person and weigh them equally
What Mill thinks about how pleasures differ in quality and how we determine which pleasures are a higher quality
A pleasure is of higher quality if people would choose it over a different pleasure even if it is accompanied by discomfort and if they would not trade it for a greater amount of the other pleasure; those that appeal to their “higher faculties”; Id rather be a human dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; id rather be a dissatisfied Socrates than a satisfied fool
Mill’s criticism of Kantianism
You never hit a contradiction
How Mill responds to the objection that utilitarianism takes too long to calculate what we are supposed to do
Human existence has been learning through experience which one is positive and negative utility
How Mill answers the question, why be moral?
External reasons: social pressure, and pressure from God
Internal reasons: conscious will be happy if you do the right thing
Know what a naturalist error theorist would think about proof of utility
Errory theorist would deny that pleasure is good. science doesn’t tells about goodness and what humans desire isn’t always good
Know the various difficult cases for ulititarism
- no partiality
- morality is too demanding - there are no supererogatory actions
- the justice objection - chop one up to save five
- can’t count for inartistic rights
- humans are good for carrying pleasure and pain but the body itself doesn’t matter
Do utilitarians believe in objective moral truths
Yes. No matter what culture, you should always maximize utility; equality should matter across all countries
Why don’t utilitarians believe in rights
container shit. can’t account for inartistic rights
